Let It Be

“European ceramics were forever indebted to superior Chinese efforts, once exposed to those wonders.”

This nugget of received wisdom, initiated by a continent-wide, 200 year long porcelain recipe hunt, permeates the study of European ceramics from roughly the 16th century onward. That perspective even percolated down to the Fine Arts studio ceramics narrative after Bernard Leach’s A Potter’s Book (1940) put celadon, tenmuku, and other Sung Dynasty (960 – 1279 CE) stonewares on unimpeachable pedestals; many of these glaze types remain to this day (in name at least) routine options in European and American studios.

But what drove the West’s China obsession during the centuries preceding Leach’s book were not Imperial Sung jewels, but hybridized, prosaic Ming Dynasty (1368 – 1644 CE) export porcelains. Few westerners even knew of those exquisite Imperial examples before the Middle Kingdom’s late 19th century implosion, just decades before Leach began his pottery career.

More to the point, export production was almost from the start led by aesthetic and functional dictates of the “devils of the western ocean.” These dictates stemmed from a highly refined Iberian, Mediterranean, and ultimately Islamic enameled earthenware tradition – which, incidently, also heavily influenced initial Chinese blue and white development. This earthenware tradition, plus a mature northern European understanding of high temperature materials and kilns, had already established ceramics as fine art worthy of Europe’s idle rich. China’s inspiration could not have been absorbed and acted upon without these pre-existing conditions.

Now consider post-China trade Europe, ie; the Industrial Revolution. Porcelain was by then widely produced throughout the continent. But the masters of the Industrial Revolution instead ran with earthenware clay and glaze materials combined with scientific analysis, increased machine power, and efficient transport of bulky supplies and fragile finished products (and a heavy dose of child labor, but that’s another story). Chinoiserie was certainly a popular decorative option, but one of many. The Industrial Revolution transformed earthenware into fine art and fine dining utensils available to nearly every level of society – a truly revolutionary development.

Interaction with China over the centuries has left an enormous and indelible mark on European and American ceramics. But leaving it at that is almost like writing a 300 page book on the history of Rock and Roll, 250 pages of which are about the Beatles. Yes, of course the Fab Four were musical geniuses who cast a long shadow.

But 250 pages? Really?

Readings:

A Potter’s Book. Bernard Leach. Transatlantic Arts/New York. 1940.
The White Road. Edmund DeWaal. Chatto and Windus/London. 2015.

Kublai Khan

In 1271 Kublai Khan, grandson of the legendary Mongolian conqueror Genghis Khan, invaded China, ended the Northern Sung Dynasty, and set up his own Yuan Dynasty.  And if you look on your kitchen shelves today, you might well see cans of soups, beans and other food items.

Admittedly, the ubiquitous modern tin can would probably have been invented regardless of the activities of rampaging Medieval horsemen from the Asian Steppes.  But seen through the lens of pottery history, the tin can embodies a curious echo of that far distant past.

Here’s how it went (pared down to four easy paragraphs):
1)  Apart from conquering and pillaging, the Mongols excelled in organizing vast stretches of territory.  Among other things, they exported Chinese pharmacological lore to the far reaches of their empire, in this case Arabia.  These medicinal herbs were stored in ceramic cylinders, often ‘wasp waisted’ for easy withdrawal from shelves (the Chinese originally used bamboo containers) and indented near the rim to facilitate a fabric tied around the top.

2)  The Arabs knew a good thing when they saw one, or two; the medicine and the jars.  They made their own versions of both, which in turn became popular in Renaissance Italy.  Once again, various Italian cities formed an entire industry around these “Albarelos.”  The Victoria Albert Museum in London has a fabulous collection of Italian tin glazed, enameled drug jars.

3)  Albarelos spread throughout Europe.  They spawned the Delftware industry in Holland.  And they eventually arrived in England as “gallipots,” named, some believe, after the manner of their transport – on large Venetian Galleys, or perhaps as containers commonly found in ships’ galleys.  (Others used the term to denote Delftware, others still just took it to mean anything made out of clay…)  Anyway, the English took gallipots to their new colonies in North America, where they were made well into the 19th century.

4)  Being such a generic, therefore useful, shape, the American gallipot took on many roles, from storing drugs, to cooking, to preserving.  Ultimately, the mid 19th century expansion of the glass jar industry replaced the gallipot, or “corker” as it was called by then.  And from the glass jar, it was a short walk to the nearest dry goods grocer for the late century tin can revolution…

…I suppose you could say that the modern re-useable yogurt container is the latest incarnation of this journey begun by Kublai Khan.

But that would be ridiculous.

Readings:
The Concise Encyclopedia of Continental Pottery and Porcelain.  Reginald Haggar.  Hawthorn Books/New York.  1960.

Early New England Potters and Their Wares.  Lura Woodside Watkins.  Harvard Press/Boston.  1968.

A Descriptive Dictionary for 500 Years of Spanish-Tradition Ceramics. 13th through 19th Cenuries.  Florence and Robert Lister ed.s.  Special Publication Series, Number 1/The Society for Historical Archeology.  1980.

If These Pots Could Talk.  Ivor Noël Hume.  University Press of New England/Hanover, NH.  2001.

Technorati Tags: Kublai Khan,Genghis Khan,Sung Dynasty,Yuan Dynasty,Mongols,Arabia,Rennaisance,Albarelos,Victoria Albert Museum,Delftware,Gallipot,Corker,Yogurt